The American Bar Association Dialogue program provides lawyers, judges and teachers with the resources they need to engage students and community members in a discussion of fundamental American legal principles and civic traditions. This Dialogue on the Fourteenth Amendment is composed of three parts:
Part 1: Equal Protection and Civil Rights – Participants discuss the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment and consider how Congress, through federal legislation, has worked to help realize its constitutional promise.
Part 2: Incorporating the Bill of Rights examines the concept of incorporation. Using a case study of Gitlow v. New York, this section provides a guide to how courts have applied the Bill of Rights, selectively, to the states using the 14th Amendment.
Part 3: Ensuring Equality and Liberty explores how the 14th Amendment has been interpreted by courts to protect fundamental freedoms, including individuals’ right to marry.
Timeline and Primary Sources: History of the Fourteenth Amendment
Students will learn about the meaning and history of the Fourteenth Amendment through this timeline and collection of primary sources.
Participate in the Judicial Process – Rule of Law
Review the facts, rulings, majority and minority opinions, and reasoning of these two landmark Fourteenth Amendment Supreme Court cases – Batson v. Kentucky and J.E.B. v. Alabama.
Evaluating the New Departure Strategy in the Fight for Women’s Suffrage
In this activity, students will evaluate the New Departure strategy of the women’s suffrage movement – the idea that the Constitution already guaranteed the right to vote for women, they just had to test it by voting – that was championed by the National Woman Suffrage Association. Students will analyze documents from Susan B. Anthony’s arrest and trial for voting in the 1872 election. They will answer questions as they work through the documents and evaluate the claim that the Fourteenth Amendment enfranchised women.
Obergefell v. Hodges and consolidated cases (2015)
These cases are about whether states are required to license same-sex marriages or to recognize lawful same-sex marriages performed in other states. In 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that one part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment and the federal government had to treat same-sex married couples the same as all other married couples. Does the Fourteenth Amendment require states to do the same? Moreover, does the Fourteenth Amendment require that all states permit marriages between two people of the same sex?
The Power of Nonviolence: Rosa Parks: A Quest for Equal Protection Under the Law
This lesson asks students to revisit the well-known story of a figure in the civil rights movement–Rosa Parks–through the primary source documents associated with her arrest in 1955. The arrest occurred in the shadow of the Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas (1954) and had a powerful impact on the public policy of segregation and the application of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Jury Selection: Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co.
This documentary examines the landmark case in which the Supreme Court decided that the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause prevents the use of race-based peremptory challenges to reject potential jurors in civil cases. A PDF lesson plan accompanies this video.
Equal Justice Under Law
In its first constitutional challenge to the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the U.S. Supreme Court decided to hear a case brought by a Chinese immigrant, not an American citizen. Yick Wo believed city ordinances had been unfairly applied to him, so he challenged their constitutionality under the equal protection clause, and took his case all the way to the Supreme Court.
LULAC v. Perry (2006)
Does a redistricting plan motivated primarily by partisan considerations violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments? This case summary shows how the Supreme Court answered that question in 2006.
Fisher v. University of Texas II (2016)
Does UT-Austin’s consideration of race in undergraduate admissions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment? This case summary considers questions of affirmative action in university admissions.